2
Objective Reasons for radiographer reporting Reasons for radiographer reporting Purpose of the study Purpose of the study Methodology Methodology Justification of the study Justification of the study Result and suggestion for the current practice Result and suggestion for the current practice

9
Justification Measuring radiographers' performance in controlled conditions in comparison with a reference standard is an assessment of validity Measuring radiographers' performance in controlled conditions in comparison with a reference standard is an assessment of validity Radiologists as gold standard Radiologists as gold standard Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis for the radiographers and consultant radiologists when reporting Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis for the radiographers and consultant radiologists when reporting

10
Justification Magnitude of inter-observer variation between consultant radiologists Magnitude of inter-observer variation between consultant radiologists Single radiologist's report should not be classified as the reference standard Single radiologist's report should not be classified as the reference standard Unless consultant radiologist with extensive experience in specific Unless consultant radiologist with extensive experience in specific Radiographers have also attained levels of accuracy Radiographers have also attained levels of accuracy

11
Another approach Search behaviour techniques Search behaviour techniques Perceptual errors occur when an observer fails to identify an abnormality Perceptual errors occur when an observer fails to identify an abnormality Radiographers comparable patterns of search strategies to radiologists Radiographers comparable patterns of search strategies to radiologists Level of accuracy comparable to radiologists Level of accuracy comparable to radiologists Assessment on subsequent effect of these reports on clinicians diagnosis and treatment plans and patient outcome Assessment on subsequent effect of these reports on clinicians diagnosis and treatment plans and patient outcome

12
Result Just under one half of patients not re-attend Just under one half of patients not re-attend For re-attended population (other half) Majority (over 80%) underwent unrelated examinations at subsequent attendance Majority (over 80%) underwent unrelated examinations at subsequent attendance 10% re-attended for repeat radiographs of same area or related examinations 10% re-attended for repeat radiographs of same area or related examinations

13
Related examination population 97% of follow up examination 97% of follow up examination Second and subsequent reports concordant to index reports. Second and subsequent reports concordant to index reports. Whether positive or negative suggestion Whether positive or negative suggestion Only four cases patients re attended for examinations related to original injury Only four cases patients re attended for examinations related to original injury Consultant suggested discrepant interpretations for wording of index reports Consultant suggested discrepant interpretations for wording of index reports

14
Suggestion for current practice With appropriate training & supervision With appropriate training & supervision Radiographers interpretation with high level of accuracy Radiographers interpretation with high level of accuracy Selection of particular ability & motivation (may not be widely applied) Selection of particular ability & motivation (may not be widely applied) Unselected radiographs or more complex imaging studies are uncertain Unselected radiographs or more complex imaging studies are uncertain Red dot system as initiative approach Red dot system as initiative approach